See also: IRC log
dialing in now … apologies for delay
David_Wood is me
<pgroth> hi sandro, for the agenda
<pgroth> provenance fpwds
@pgroth Congrats on your FPWD!
<scribe> scribe: bhyland
<pgroth> prov-o ontology
<pgroth> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/
pgroth: THis has been published, http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/
<sandro> "The PROV Ontology: Model and Formal Semantics"
<Guus> [provo is Dutch word for sixties hippie activists :-) ]
2nd WD for second data model. The Provenance WG has been busy!
More will be published in early 2012 for review.
<pgroth> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html
If someone had time to read one draft during the holidays, they should focus on the PROV Ontology or data model (more complicated but more readable).
<pgroth> Primer: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html
Recommended reading is the Provenance Primer, which will be published officially next year, but is good to go. See http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html
One of the co-chairs of the recent LED workshop held at MIT last week, sponsored by Oracle, IBM and (3 Round Stones).
IBM & Oracle are looking at pursuing Linked Data in product strategies
Workshop home page is here, http://www.w3.org/2011/09/LinkedData/
<Guus> [have to step outside for 5 min]
Extensive discussion around enterprise use of Linked Data lead by • Arnaud Le Hors (IBM)
• David Wood (3 Round Stones)
• Ashok Malhotra (Oracle)
<sandro> ( + Nokia)
The workshop went pretty well, good participation from organizers and EMC, Elsevier. Sandro, TimBL and EricP spent two days there.
<pgroth> +q
Position papers were required to participate. The papers covered stability, issues, e.g., URIs that needed to change (sometimes for esoteric reasons), provenance issues … all related to real world use of RDF.
<sandro> public-ldp@w3.org
Conversation was lively, deep interest by participants. Participants felt that an Enterprise Linked Data Working Group should be stood up to address these issues.
<sandro> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/basic-profile-linked-data
Mailing list has been put together. IBM is taking the lead on proposing some issues that may become part of the WG charter.
Member submission will include feedback from IBM, Oracle, EMC, Dave Wood, others.
<sandro> pgroth: Oracle interesting in Prov within GOvernement Risk and Compliance products
Paul: There is good participation from Oracle on the Provenance WG. Was anyone from Oracle Gov't Risk & Compliance area present?
DavidWood: No, Ashok was Oracle participant.
Sandro: Interesting points about the workshop was emphasis on Linked Data as a R/W platform, very much emphasizing RDF + ReST
<pgroth> +q
Sandro: IBM wants to keep this separate from semantic web stack, specifically SPARQL & OWL. Meaning IBM wants to add RDF to ReST which they are comfortable with. Interesting perspective to hear that RDF + ReST approach is better approach than those previously tried & commonly held as best practice.
<davidwood> LEDP Workshop minutes:
<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/12/07-ledp-minutes.html
<davidwood> LEDP Workshop schedule, which includes links to slides: http://www.w3.org/2011/09/LinkedData/Schedule
Sandro: Advance Notice of Work will be circulated to solicit interest from W3C members. Interested if others perk up with this different framing.
pgroth: What standard would this proposed WG pursue?
<sandro> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/basic-profile-linked-data
Sandro: IBM expands TimBL's 4 principles to about 12 items in terms of what they are looking to do, see http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/basic-profile-linked-data
Sandro & Davidwood: A standard is needed to do this in a reliable way is needed to facilitate adoption by the big enterprises.
bhyland: Explain the different framing more please ...
davidwood: There is as basic set of approaches that are sufficient to break the N2 API problem between enterprise products that is not database centric and therefore doesn't need a query language based solution.
<pgroth> +q
davidwood: It is going to take
big companies some time to really realize the ramifications of
having a standard query language available on the Web for
people to use … that will take a decade to fully permeate all
the complex aspects of product development, systems
interoperability, database interoperability. We cannot expect
the big database vendors to turn on a dime, it will take time
to overcome the inertia.
... the problem being discussed extensively was reducing
different APIs, rather, looking to RDF as common data
interchange format.
pgroth: Pharma companies are facing challenges that would be solved by using a common linked data format … Companies are always asking to solve these common set of questions and I have to usually invent something. It would be nice if there was a commonly used standard.
Sandro: Discussed upping the volume of blogposts to the Semantic Activity and eGov Activity pages
<davidwood> +1, although I've promised to write some news stories for RDF WG and am behind schedule
Suggested monthly blog posts that are newsy in nature.
<sandro> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/
bhyland: confirmed she is posting to the eGov activity page today with the CIO primer on LD
<pgroth> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/23/5-simple-provenance-statements/
<sandro> pgroth: Don't expose guts, but do provide simple view
pgroth: Suggested higher level summary, high points of the progress made to date in a given WG is a good way to go.
Focus on the simple stuff, not the detailed nuances.
+1 pgroth
<pgroth> but not just highlights, easy interpretation
<sandro> bhyland: From SemTechBiz/East, in DC, 2 weeks ago
<sandro> ... feedback from audience mentioned, often, the need for better materials for making the case to ones boss about ROI, Success Stories
<sandro> ... needn't be traditional ROI, since this was largely public sector
<sandro> ... We (3RoudnStones) did something like this for EPA, and we're working on repurposing it for general W3C use
<sandro> ... I'm also trying to convince W3C management we need a concerted program here, including Videos, ....
<sandro> ... It's all well and good to have these best practices, but sometimes we need to make the case
<sandro> ... are folks on the call finding this being asked for?
<pgroth> +q
<sandro> bhyland: Do you find yourself needing a CIO Primer, covering eg how this relates to Relational Technology, and describing ROI and success story?
<davidwood> Semantic Web and the Linked Data Enterprise by Dean Allemang: http://3roundstones.com/led_book/led-allemang.html
<sandro> tbaker: Just an observation. The schema.org approach, providing fixed solutions. I wonder how successful that is, providing off-the-shelf solutuons.
Tbaker: The schema.org approach
is to provide fixed solutions and I'm wondering how successful
that is & are there any lessons learned? Any benefit to
providing "off the shelf" solutions.
... The idea is to give people something simple that they can
copy and use in their apps. How successful is that and is it
being taken up? Any lessons we can learn for pitching sem
web?
<pgroth> queue
<sandro> pgroth: Clear guidelines, Clear best practice, "What do I do now" -- and they want it from an official source. Schema.org has been fantastic for that. In my domains, there is not a lot of common space, so having these kinds of recommendations would help a lot.
<sandro> pgroth: Having nice swag, marketing materlsa is great.
pgroth: I've had a lot of requests from people on clear guidelines, clear best practices on "what do I do now" and they want it from an "official source". Schema.org has been fantastic for that being very clear on what to do. Especially relevant where this is unclear or unspecified guidance. Always having nice swag & marketing kit helps drive the point home.
Guus: I agree. … lost Guus' audio
<sandro> Guus: Of course, I agree. During OWL, and the Best Practices .... [phone call dropped]
sandro: We agree that clear guidance is great, and what each of the respective WG's are trying to do.
<sandro> guus: A big difference between what people would like to have, and what they are willing to do.
Guus: There is a big difference between what people would like to have and what people are willing to do… it is difficult to say we're going to produce best practice ….
<sandro> guus: In the SWBPDWG we had people working on the link to Software Engineering....
<sandro> guus: Either you're product specific, or you're very general and don't say much.
Guus: You have to either be very specific or stay very general which doesn't say very much. Defining the middle ground is hard.
<pgroth> gotta go
bhyland: There is a gap between well-defined standards and making the case to IT managers who have the budget to authorize staff/consultant to implement the standard & best practices in a given prototype or preliminary project.
Sandro: Will you make minutes?
<sandro> yes, bhyland, thanks!
ta
bye!
<sandro> options: final
<sandro> options: -final
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: bhyland Inferring ScribeNick: bhyland Default Present: sandro, Guus, BernHyland, David_Wood, tbaker, pgroth, +20598aaaa Present: sandro Guus BernHyland David_Wood tbaker pgroth +20598aaaa Got date from IRC log name: 14 Dec 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/12/14-swcg-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]